Practice question
A legal team has a well-reasoned monograph, a short unsourced assertion by another author, and official materials that appear inconsistent with both. It must advise whether a customary obligation exists. Which method best reflects the subsidiary role of teachings?
- Count how many pages favor each conclusion.
- Treat the unsourced assertion as binding if confidently written.
- Evaluate the teachings' reasoning against relevant practice and opinio juris, rather than letting either publication conclusively determine the rule.
- Ignore official materials because scholars are independent.
- Assume every scholarly disagreement eliminates all international law.
Legal references
- ICJ Statute, Articles 38(1)(d) and 59: https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/statute-of-the-international-court-of-justice
- ILC, Conclusions on Identification of Customary International Law (2018), Conclusions 2 and 12–14: https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft_articles/1_13_2018.pdf
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.